Jump to content

All Rounders Do Not Exist Part - II


Khota

Recommended Posts

Just now, Khota said:

Kapil Dev was a strike bowler. Pandya is a bottom feeder. How many overs did he bowl in IPL???

 

yet number are close to kapil, even if u come close to a legend u have done well

u want him to relapse his injury , yea possible so u can scream see he is not fit. 

Did u see bhuvi who isnt letting it heal and having constant relapses, pandya is avoiding it. Dont worry he ll bowl...when he did in last 2 yrs he was their 2nd best bowler and one yr did better then bumrah

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

yet number are close to kapil, even if u come close to a legend u have done well

u want him to relapse his injury , yea possible so u can scream see he is not fit. 

Did u see bhuvi who isnt letting it heal and having constant relapses, pandya is avoiding it. Dont worry he ll bowl...when he did in last 2 yrs he was their 2nd best bowler and one yr did better then bumrah

That is your problem. You don't get it.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

clearly ur the one who is not able to convince anyone here and none of captains or team in world is following u and im not getting it.....hmmm

 

 

I dont need to convince anyone. Proof is that Hardik did not bowl an over. Proof is Stokes did jack. Proof is proper bowlers took wkts. proof is you will never learn.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Khota said:

I dont need to convince anyone. Proof is that Hardik did not bowl an over. 

 

To what get injured like bhuvi n miss out for an year more so u can add more years saying he hasnt done much....thats sadistic 

 

2 minutes ago, Khota said:

 

Proof is Stokes did jack.

 

He scored a 100

2 minutes ago, Khota said:

 

Proof is proper bowlers took wkts. proof is you will never learn.

 

Isnt it their job to take wkts ? 

Didnt stonis , morris, tewatia took wkts

Link to comment

Tired of this thread by Khota

 

Your point is "don't force fit all rounders in the team" and not "all rounders don't exist". Maybe you should consider rewording your thread

 

The only debate here is whether a 6 batsmen + 5 bowler combination will work.

Many captains don't like that combination.

They might like the 5th bowler to contribute slog it out a bit with the bat ( like a Pat cummins) or the 7th batman to give 7-8 overs (like Hardik did until 2019).

 

There will be good days or bad days for Hardik or for that matter any bowler 

 

It's futile discussing this beyond this point.

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

To what get injured like bhuvi n miss out for an year more so u can add more years saying he hasnt done much....thats sadistic 

 

 

He scored a 100

 

Isnt it their job to take wkts ? 

Didnt stonis , morris, tewatia took wkts

They did their job. Hardik was an allrounder and failed to do his job. Stokes failed to do his job.

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, bowl_out said:

Tired of this thread by Khota

 

Your point is "don't force fit all rounders in the team" and not "all rounders don't exist". Maybe you should consider rewording your thread

 

The only debate here is whether a 6 batsmen + 5 bowler combination will work.

Many captains don't like that combination.

They might like the 5th bowler to contribute slog it out a bit with the bat ( like a Pat cummins) or the 7th batman to give 7-8 overs (like Hardik did until 2019).

 

There will be good days or bad days for Hardik or for that matter any bowler 

 

It's futile discussing this beyond this point.

Not that simple.

 

I sound like a broken record but a human physiology is not meant to do two tasks. Muscle groups required for bowling are totally different for batting. One body cannot do two tasks at the highest level. You need specialist.

 

Baseball is a perfect example of that.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Vilander said:

So your assertion is untrue then. Simple he did exist. 

That is semantics game you are playing. Once again if all someone can show me is that in 100 years of Indian cricket there was one Kapil I will give it to them. At the same time my point is that don't go around looking for one as the yield is low.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Khota said:

When KApil was playing there was no option. There are a dozen bowlers better than Pandya. Atleast a dozen.

So? None of those dozen bowlers can bat at 6. I'm not sure what personal rivalry you have with Pandya but adding depth to the batting order is a real concept that all top teams follow. Sometimes you sacrifice some bowling talent to add more batting in the team. 

 

Tell me your opinion about the two teams that reached wc final last year. Should NZ have dropped Neesham/Grandhomme? Southee is better bowler than both of them.

Should England have dropped Ben stokes/Chris woakes? Chris Jordan is better bowler than both of them.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Khota said:

I sound like a broken record but a human physiology is not meant to do two tasks. Muscle groups required for bowling are totally different for batting. One body cannot do two tasks at the highest level. You need specialist.

What about wicket keeping then, that's an entirely different talent. Please open another thread on how wicket keeping batsman does not exist because pant flopped this year. Afterall we only have one great wkb in our cricket history, maybe we should stop looking for wkbs too. Let's have wicket keeper who bats at 10 again.

 

Come to think of it, fielding is a talent too. We need to have a specialist slip catchers and gully fielders. Proof is all the catches kohli has dropped. Good batsmen who are great fielders do not exist. 

Link to comment

Again, I see most people missing the point. An all-rounder in the truest sense of the term must be good enough to be picked in the side for his bowling or batting alone. While the numerous players cited as examples are either batsmen who are handy bowlers or vice-versa, barely a few would fit the criteria if applied strintently. Sobers gets effusive praise now but his bowling was criticized back in the day. Bottom line is, if a player merits selection for his strong skills in one discipline and also has additional skills, treat that as a bonus. Don't try to manufacture an all-rounder out of him and turn him into an Irfan Pathan. Don't look for an all-rounder at the very outset to end up with serial injuries, like Watto and Mitch. Don't pick mediocre players just because they bat and bowl, neither of which convincingly. Binny, Shankar, Dubey fall in that category. Then there is the raw, unpolished type who seems to have potential whose fulfilment keeps getting postponed, like you know who. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, nevada said:

Again, I see most people missing the point. An all-rounder in the truest sense of the term must be good enough to be picked in the side for his bowling or batting alone. While the numerous players cited as examples are either batsmen who are handy bowlers or vice-versa, barely a few would fit the criteria if applied strintently. Sobers gets effusive praise now but his bowling was criticized back in the day. Bottom line is, if a player merits selection for his strong skills in one discipline and also has additional skills, treat that as a bonus. Don't try to manufacture an all-rounder out of him and turn him into an Irfan Pathan. Don't look for an all-rounder at the very outset to end up with serial injuries, like Watto and Mitch. Don't pick mediocre players just because they bat and bowl, neither of which convincingly. Binny, Shankar, Dubey fall in that category. Then there is the raw, unpolished type who seems to have potential whose fulfilment keeps getting postponed, like you know who. 

Your point is valid but the one made by the other guy is not. 

 

See there are 3 categories of players 

1) genuine AR - Kapil, Shakib, klusener etc 

2) Bits n Pieces - Stuart Binny

3) batsman who could bowl / bowlers who could bat. - Ganguly, Pollock etc

 

Only players that fall under number 2 comes under the category of "useless". 

 

Just because number genuine of all-rounders are few doesn't mean you shouldn't look for them. In fact that make them even more precious.

 

I have avoided posting on such threads because it's a waste of time and@Ankit_sharma03 should also do the same. 

 

Edited by OpeningBatsman
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...